TURNER, Maine — Chris Jordan rotated his safety switch to semiautomatic, aimed, and squeezed the trigger.

In his hands, the German-made submachine gun twitched as it fired a 9-mm bullet at a speed of more than 1,000 feet per second. The round had sunk safely into the sand of a nearby gravel pit wall when its sound arrived.

It resembled a sneeze.

“You don’t get the dangerous, thunderous report with this thing,” said Jordan, CEO and owner of G3 Firearms in Turner. On the far end of the barrel, a black metal cylinder seemed to make all the difference.

A moment later, Jordan slid the switch to automatic, allowing a single tug of the trigger to send a hail of bullets against the loose gravel wall.

Sneezes.

It’s that sound, or lack of it, that’s creating a sudden boom in local silencer sales.

In the 76 years between 1934, when the federal government began registering all silencer sales, and December 2010, when the most recent numbers are available, a total of 1,135 silencers were legally sold in Maine, according to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Those numbers may be deceiving.

Cities such as Lewiston and Auburn have logged few sales, said police chiefs in both cities. Federal rules call for each registration to be accompanied by a criminal background check, fingerprints, a $200 tax payment and the signature of the local law enforcement head.

Registration requests arrive at a rate of two or three each year, Lewiston police Chief Mike Bussiere and Auburn Chief Phil Crowell agreed. In Franklin County, Sheriff Dennis Pike said he has signed off on one silencer in his long career.

However, since 2007, Androscoggin County Sheriff Guy Desjardins has signed off on 59.

In 2007, his first year in office, requests from places including Turner, Greene and Durham totaled 4. In 2011, there were 20 registrations for silencers.

“I have no idea why they would want them,” Desjardins said. After all, Maine law bans their use in hunting, he said. “Unless they’re target shooting, who knows?”

But Jamie Pelletier, who manages J.T. Reid’s Gun Shop in Auburn, said people often drop by looking for silencers.

“People are running out of places they can shoot without bothering their neighbors,” Pelletier said. He can’t sell silencers, known in gun circles as “cans,” because his shop doesn’t have the needed Class 3 tax status. But he listens and sympathizes.

“Everything is becoming so urbanized,” he said. The days when large numbers of Mainers could target shoot in their backyards are waning, he said. People are living more closely together and the sound frightens people.

To Jordan, one of about a dozen Class 3 dealers in Maine, silencers are a growing niche.

Part of his work is education, he said. People think of silencers as devices used exclusively by movie assassins, screwed onto the ends of handguns by men wearing black gloves.

“About 30 to 40 percent of the people who come in here think they’re illegal,” Jordan said. “Maybe more.”

Even some law enforcement officials think they’re banned.

Jordan said he was once threatened by a coastal town’s police chief, who insisted that silencers could not be sold lawfully.

I said, ‘Look. I’m a licensed dealer in the state of Maine,” Jordan said. “You can’t take my silencers away from me.”

“He said, ‘You come to my town and I’m going to arrest you,’” Jordan said. “I said, ‘I’m going to win. They’re legal.’”

His most popular silencer screws onto the end of a .22-caliber rifle, a target gun.

Silencers can range from just under $300 for a small suppressor that attaches to a .22-caliber gun to $600 or more for a machine-gun silencer.

After the purchase, the application is mailed and each accessory goes under lock and key.

The ATF portion of the process often takes as long as six months to clear, Jordan said.

Federal regulations spelled out in the 1934 National Firearms Act made it difficult to buy the silencers, requiring the same background checks as short-barreled rifles and shotguns, machine guns and fringe weapons classified by a catch-all “any other weapons” category. Felons are prohibited from owning silencers. And the required $200 tax is the same $200 that was levied when Franklin Roosevelt was president.

Desjardins personally performs each background check that crosses his desk.

“I could give it to one of my detectives, but they’ve got too much work,” he said. The background checking can take two hours if the applicant has moved a lot. “If somebody has been convicted of a violent crime or I have worries about it, I don’t have to sign it.”

He has never denied an applicant, he said.

To see more from the Sun Journal, visit sunjournal.com.

Join the Conversation

249 Comments

  1. Silencers (Suppressors) were required by civilians in parts of Europe because of noise complaints. The foolish hysteria in America has been drawn from too much Hollywood.

     Chris Jordan makes a very good point on silencer ownership. Some law enforcement officers are ignorant on the laws that apply to gun ownership of Class 3 weapons and this is really unacceptable. There needs to be much more education of what is legal (and how it’s legally purchased).  Also, there is a huge difference between a Class 3 fully automatic machine gun and a civilian military style semiautomatic rifle. I understand that law enforcement have a ridiculous amount of regulations and statutes to know – but Class 3 weapons ownership is very elementary and we are talking laws that are over fifty years old.

    1. Silencers were required in “parts of Europe” to prevent hearing loss, not for any other reason. The European Union passed comprehensive gun legislation in 2007 to standardize laws across the member countries and to restrict ownership to people with specific reasons to posess guns, such as shooting clubs, hunting permits, etc.  Gun ownership rules in the UK are stricter than in the rest of western Europe.

      1.  I know of suppressors in the UK. However my German friends I used to shoot with overseas had semiauto variants of  M1 Garands, M1 Carbines,M14’s, G3’s, AR15’s, and a vast array of handguns and other battle rifles legally owned by them, I would say their laws are worse then Massachusetts – nonetheless they were allowed ownership. And yes, the EU and it’s countries tend to be very antigun. The US is slowly creeping that way if socialists here are allowed to strip citizens of firearms, effectively making every US citizen a potential victim of criminals or government abuse.

        1. Ah — the “fear of ‘ocialists” argument/irrationality. No one is going to strip you of anything.

      2. What do you expect from a country that will not even allow the vast majority of their Law Enforcement to be armed.

  2. I’m not sure if it done out of ignorance or sensationalism but “submachine gun” and “machine-gun” are really just semi-automatic and automatic rifles/pistols…

    At least it doesn’t say “assault rifle”…

    1.  If you’re a law enforcement officer staring down the barrel of that rifle, it’s an assault rifle.

        1. My Dad, a decorated WWII combat veteran, who owned and shot many types of guns, and who taught me to be an excellent shot, would have tanned my hide if I ever pointed even a cap-gun at a person. 

          He said it was far too easy to mistake a real gun for a play gun.  (Accounting for many horrific accidental shootings). Also, that you never pointed a gun at anyone, a toy gun, or otherwise, unless you had every intention of killing them.

          As to silencers and sound suppressors – consider the guy wearing ear protection that is blowing one leaf with a leaf blower across an entire parking lot. Part of why he persists, instead of bending over and picking up the leaf, is that he is not subject to the horrific sound of the the blower. So, he’ll keep ‘firing’ away with that leaf blower. And, at least every living thing in a 10 mile radius knows he’s there.

          People need to have all senses involved, especially when handling and firing weapons. The impact of the weapon must be heard, seen, and felt. That is a key component of understanding its lethal nature. It is dangerous to make any part of the experience virtual.

          1. I GREW UP IN THE SIXTIES AND WAS TAUGHT THOSE SAME RULES BY MY GRANDFATHER THEN FOUND OUT IN THE ARMY WHAT HE MENT AND NO SANE PERSON EVER POINTS A FIREARM AT ANY ONE OR THING UNLESS YOU MEAN TO USE IT AND IF MORE PEOPLE WERE TAUGHT THAT THEN MAYBE WE WOULD NOT HAVE AS MANY ACCIDENTAL SHOOTINGS. GRAMPS ALSO TAUGHT ME TO TREAT EVERY GUN LIKE ITS LOADED UNTILL YOU OPEN THE BREACH TO CLEAR IT AND ALWAYS BE SURE THE SAFTY IS ON UNTILL YOUR READY TO SHOOT !

          2. in case you didn’t realize, posting in all caps is like yelling at everyone who reads your post, just thought you might need a heads up. 
            That said, guns are as safe as the person holding them, plain and simple. Sounds like your grandfather taught you well. 

          3. Sorry for my typeing error . I’m new to this my daughter told me the same thing as soon as she read my posts. Again my opologies for yelling. 

      1. This doesn’t make any sense. I am glad to know you value a cops life over a regular citizen though and justify the use of force without requiring an officer to properly identify his target.

    2.  A machine gun is a firearm in a RIFLE that continues to fire as long as the trigger is depressed.

      A SUB-machine gun is the same thing in a PISTOL caliber.

      A semi auto is a firearm that fires one round reloads then fires another round on a subsequent trigger pull.

      FYI these are also legal in Maine however unlike suppressors that can be had brand new MG’s ( Machine guns) must be transferable meaning they must have been on a form 1 or form 4 prior to the 1986 Regan ban. Civilians can not buy a new machine gun.

  3. The focus should be on the excessive federal tax.  It is discriminatory as to only the “rich” can afford it.

    1. You mean the same tax that has not changed since 1930 or the fact that a good firearm is much more than $200.  If you can afford to spend $800 -$1500 or more on a gun you can afford the $200 fee.

  4. The term >silencer< is misleading. They are actually sound suppressors.  The very same thing as the muffler on any auto only designed to take the higher pressures involved.  The use of the term silencer is simply a popular name in use because or the commonality of the term. 

    Coupled with the use of underpowered "subsonic" ammunition; sound suppressors can make the shooting sport a very pleasant experience not withstanding is the lack of complaints from certain neighbors who always seem to think something sinister might be going on.

    The taxes are too steep for rational background checks and were established when checks had to be done by hand during the heyday of nearly a century ago when violent criminals actually were the big news of the day. 

    1. The issue with this is that they are referred to by name in legislation as silencers so they can go by either name and the person using the term would not be incorrect.

        1. ehh its nearly 80 year old legislation, I let it slide. The funny thing in these comments is people making it out like criminals will follow the laws, shell out the big bucks, and wait months when all a suppressor is made out of is some pipe and baffles. For 15 bucks at a hardware store a criminal could get the materials to make a good suppressor without the hassle of paperwork for what would amount to very little time behind bars on top of whatever other crimes involved would get.  Restricting law abiding citizens because the potential acts of criminals is comical.

  5. I’m waiting for the comment from the gun-head that explains to me how a silencer is critical for defending against home invasion.

    1. Now that was funny.  I bet you would have been right except you’ve “suppressed” the impending comment.

    2.  Its not a must but if you have ever shot in a confined area you would see why it would be preferred. 

          1.  “Discharged a firearm” sounds like somebody trying to make shooting a gun sound more dignified than it is.  Yeah – I’ve shot a gun in an indoor range, with ear protection like any thinking person.  Big deal.

          2.  Assault rifles.  Gun’s set up to accept silencers.  Gun’s with high capacity magazines.  Semi-automatic and fully automatic weapons.

          3. George Washington’s muzzle loading muskets were the assault weapon of their day.  What if they had been confiscated by people who believe like you.  Would we have an United States of America today?

          4. You cannot conceivably compare muzzle-loaders with the weapons available today, nor, their intended use.  And, that poster said nothing about confiscating your weapons.

            Here’s an irony for you – the very few people here who have not been in complete agreement with the thinking of you, and most others, are coming under such attack in such a manner as it appears that you are not secure about owning these weapons, nor your right to them, nor the reason to own them.  What are you, so well-armed, afraid of from these few without guns?  

            Why is it that the people with these “heavy” guns are saying we need protection from our own government, yet are the first to throw out Constitutional Amendments, and the founding of this country.  That’s not patriotism. 

            Did you read the comment here about the man who showed the poster’s friend’s 11 year old daughter a gun he had in hiw gym bag?  Nightmares.

          5. I am absolutely serious.  Nice try playing the victim.  Saying you, and people who agree with you are being attacked.  Not so.  The ones that are being attacked daily are the believers in the 2nd Amendment.  The 1st Amendment protects speech, including speech you don’t like, the 2nd Amendment SHOULD protect all guns.  Not just the ones you don’t like.  People like you, and the government are the biggest threat to personal freedoms that are covered by the bill of rights.

          6. Not “playing the victim.”  I’ll edit the word if it will make you feel better.

            Explain how you come to the conclusion that “people like me,” I am included as one of the two “biggest threa(s)t to personal freedoms?” 

          7. Since 1934 the right to own firearms has been officially under attack.
            Which Constitutional Amendment has been under attack here, beyond the 1st Amendment’s freedom of religion (and occasionally the freedom of expression against Fox News, Rush, Sean and their ilk) and 2nd Amendment?

          8. And, yet, everyone still has them.  Not a very successful “attack,” then.  Do you mean intelligent discourse?  Is it always wrong to question?  I always believed that, as a society, there are rules we must follow, but that to do so blindly, is wrong.

          9. I don’t know, If in 1934 Congress said that they were making everyone give up their firearms, what would have happened? There would have been a second American revolution.
            But by using the crisis of major criminal activity, caused by Prohibition, they got the American population accecpt the banning, or making unavailable to most of the population, entire classes of firearms.
            Since then the American public has accecpted the further banning of the inexpensive firearms that poor, mostly innercity black, citizens used to defend themselves from the violent criminal element of the inner city.
            Now the deamonization of many other firearms is occuring. Firearms, or gun, voilence is being clamed to be a problem while what should be said is “violence committed by people using firearms”
            It seems like the total ban of privatly owned firearms is progressing fairly well.

          10. I have AR-15s, which YOU consider “non-hunting” guns.  I hunt with them. I find them to be very effective and accurate. As with any “hunting” gun, I plug the magazines to accept only the legal number of bullets allowed for the particular game I am hunting that day.

          11. Well based on your definition ALL firearms would be “assault” rifles as any firearm can be set up to accept suppressors (silencers).

            “High capacity magazines” – how many rounds makes a “high capacity magazine”? 3, 5. 10, 20?

            “Semi-automatic” – so no person could own a historic M1 Garand or Carbine because they are self loading (semi-automatic) and in your opinion “assault rifles”. And a Ruger 10-22 .22 caliber 10 round box magazine certainly is not an “assault rifle” but because it is a “semi-automatic” and has a 10 round magazine (high capacity magazine?) you would ban it as an “assault rifle”.

          12. I will get stoned to death with you here – why does an ordinary citizen need a semi-automatic weapon that can fire hundreds of bullets (machine guns, etc) when it takes only a couple of rounds to protect yourself?  Is there any reason to it other than “because it’s my right to own a semi-automatic weapon?”  I don’t believe so.  And no, I am for “bearing arms” but we always draw that line in the proverbial sand, and cross over it again and again, almost cheapening the basis behind it because we constantly abuse what it was supposed to stand for.

        1. The time I accidentally shot a 12 gauge in my bedroom at night. I thought I died . It Involved alcohol at the time. I took it away from one drunk person. Guess I did not realize he already reloaded it. Glad I do not drink or keep bullets in the house.

        2. None, but I will shoot as many that enter the confined space of my home to cause harm to my family or me.

        3.  If, God forbid, you EVER have to shoot someone in the gravest extreme of self defense it will be in a confined area (if it’s self defense) and you will not have hearing protection. With that said, I would not want a suppressor on a weapon I just used in self defense given our modern court system and the media manipulation of facts.  From a military standpoint, suppressors have been used not so much to hide the noise as to obscure the location of the shooter. If you are a law abiding citizen, who cares what your recreational use of it is – it’s no one’s business. I can’t afford Class 3 toys but good on those who can. I am sick of people trying to legislatively limit personal behavior that does infringe on the rights of others.

          1.  “Media manipulation of facts”.   Sounds like you are alluding to that guy who killed an unarmed kid in Florida.  All the ‘media manipulation’ in the world can’t change the basic facts – tough guy out looking for trouble, packing heat, calls 911 and is told to leave the kid alone, shoots him dead. 

          2. If some punk kid is beating my head against a sidewalk I am not going to ask if he is unarmed.  I am going to give him the biggest surprise of his soon to be shortened life….

          3. Please pay attention to facts.
            First there was  no suppressor used in this instance.
            Second the media DID manipulate the facts here. They edited the 911 call, they claimed that the shooter showed no signs of attack, identified the shooter as white not Cuban … All to convict the man in the court of public opinion.
            Another, all be it different type of manipulation, is the fact that gangs of black youts have attacked white men and beat some of them sensless while screeming “This is for Trayvon”, and the only coverage has been local media and some web pages.

          4. Not knowing the facts of the case (none of us do at this point).  Please tell me what you would do if you had a weapon and were attacked by somebody?  Would you not defend yourself with that weapon because the attacker is “unarmed.”

            With your rationale, law abiding citizens might as well not carry anything (guns, knives, pepper spray, etc).  As for silencers, if they are legal, they are legal.  I own guns and would probably never  buy one, but if somebody else wants to do so, fine by me.  Paying $200 for the right to then buy a silencer isn’t something I would do.

    3. Why should they have to explain anything, they are legal if they want them why would that hurt you live and let live. Laws are already in place preventing felons from ownership.A silencer on a shotgun would be a big bonus on ear protection imo.

      1. “I have no idea why they would want them,” Desjardins said. After all, Maine law bans their use in hunting, he said. “Unless they’re target shooting, who knows?”

        I can only see one reason other than noise complaints for a silencer, that would be murder.  The problem i see with this is exactly why people say they want them, because it keeps neighbors from getting upset about the noise.  I dont know about anyone else, and i realize that here in Maine there are a ton of gun advocates, but if i had children, i dont want anyone within a mile of me shooting off a gun in their back yard where it might accidently go the wrong way and strike my child.  I dont even care how remote those odds may be.  Guns are great for protection, sport and even target practice, but guns have ZERO place being shot in Urban areas unless you are using it to protect yourself….plain and simple.

        1. “guns have ZERO place being shot in rural areas unless you are using it to protect yourself….plain and simple.”

          I am sure you probably meant urban areas versus rural as you stated.

        2. Guess how many murders are done with NFA items? Zero for all realistic purposes with two known murders with registered machine guns.

          Banning or legislating against something the media portrays as scary but in reality is difficult to attain due to costs, paperwork, and bureaucracy is just a waste of time and money. 

          1.  Not true there was ONE LEGAL NFA item used in a murder. It was a Le depts MP5 used by a officer to kill his wife. That is the ONLY case of a legal NFA item being used in a criminal manner.

          2. There was another murder with a doctor killing his wife with an nfa item and the famous Gary Fadden incident, which wasn’t criminal on his part but a DA with big dreams sure made his life hell

        3. I HAVE BEEN FIREING RIFLES, PISTOLS AND SHOTGUNS SINCE THE AGE OF EIGHT AND IN MY EXPERIENCE EVERY BULLIT HAS GONE IN A STRAIGHT LINE . I HAVE NEVER SEEN OR HAD ONE GO IN ANY OTHER DIRECTION OTHER THAN WHAT I WAS AIMING AT. THE KEY TO SAFE FIREARMS USE IS TO IDENTIFY YOUR TARGET AND WHAT IS BEHIND IT. THATS WHY WE HAVE GUN OWNER SAFTY COURSES. I TAUGHT BOTH OF MY CHILDREN HOW TO HANDLE A FIREARM BEFOR THEY WERE TEN YEARS OLD AND FIRED THOSE WEAPONS REGULARLY IN MY BACK YARD WITH NEIGHBORS ABOUT ONE YARDS AWAY. NO ONE WANTS TO SHOOT YOU OR YOUR CHILDREN BUT IF YOU LIVE OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS YOU  WILL HEAR GUNFIRE.

          1. Who said anything about u-turns? Bullets do not travel in a straight line outdoors. That’s a fact. See “wind” and “gravity.”

        4. As the owner of a couple dozen of them let me tell you why people have and get them.

          Makes shooting pleasant and SAFER as you can hear the person next to you.
          They almost eliminate recoil thus making teaching new shooters much easier and safer.  
          They let you shoot without causing permanent damage to ones ears.

        5. You trust the government to much.  They just passed a law that gives them the right to read all emails sent on the planet. they can turn the cams on your computers from a remote location.. and again why would you except loosing the right to privacy, one right at a time going down the toilet all for you safety..

          1. Careful now guys, dont take me the wrong way.  I never once said i didnt approve of people owning guns.  I disapprove of people shooting guns in close proximity to other neighbors where someone can easily get hurt.  I hear what you are all saying about gun safety and learning from a young age and agree with all of you on that.  I also agree completely with protecting yourself.  What i am confused about is the need for a silencer, being that it seems someone is trying to hide what they are doing, ie.  a “Hit”.  Your arguments on hearing damage are understandable.  I am sure those that would argue with that would say why do something that damages your hearing?  I am not going to take that argument though.  Whether for sport or protection i have always believed in maintaining my 2cd ammendment rights and will always vote against anyone in government trying to reform that.

          2. As with everything else done to “prevent gun violence” (as if the gun caused the violence) they are useless,  if someone is out to murder someone a way will be found. Someone bent on murder does not care if lesser crimes have to be broken to commit said murder.

        6. You are absolutely right about guns in urban areas, except to store them in your home. Urban areas are far too densely populated to be target practicing, or any other sport shooting.

          It all comes down to using guns responsibly. I have several guns. Long guns and handguns. Traditional hunting rifles and assault rifles (which, as I said earlier, I use for hunting). I teach my kids to be responsible with the guns. I also teach them that they need to accept responsibility for everything they do with the guns.

          There is a time and a place for everything, responsibly.

    4. So what you got out of the story was silencers were to protect yourself from home invaders???What are you going to do throw it at them. 

      Why are their so many different auto models..  Why don’t we do what the Russians use to do and make only one style,  brand and color of car for the regular folk.. Why would you want something different??

      1. oh friggin’ sweet idea. We can all get an old SeAZ. wicked small engine. Oh and can I have mine in a plain primer grey pleases. That would be awesome thanks. (sarcasm off)

        1. Do you want to be able to choose on your own without the government telling you what type of car to buy??
          Some people want to choose weather or not to own guns without government telling them no.

    5. If you need to discharge a weapon in your home, it’s going to be loud. Do you still want to hear your family telling you they’re hurt or need help? What if there are more threats in your house – do you want to hear them moving around? Go fire a 5.56mm rifle in your hallway and tell me how well you can hear for the next 24 hours. There’s your answer. Happy?

  6. Not sure why Sheriff Desjardins is doing background checks, he just needs to sign paperwork. The fingerprint cards go to the fbi and they do all the criminal history work. The chief law enforcement officer signature exists from a time before the NICS checks and it was just a way to ensure that the undesirables (blacks, irish, chinese) couldn’t get a weapon. Remember that the GCA originally intended on banning pistols which is why it restricted short barreled rifles and shotguns. It was mean to disarm the poor “trouble causing” minorities with a large tax fee and the inability to get firearms.

    Thankfully there are ways around the CLEO signature, such as starting a living trust and submitting the paperwork through that. This is also smart because it is much easier to transfer the ownership of the NFA items afterwards. The BATFE is also doing away with the CLEO signature in the near future so one less hoop to jump through.

    1.  If you’re going to sign a piece of paper that says a person can buy a suppressor, wouldn’t you be sure the background checks are done, since it will be your signature that’s on the license?

      Besides, local law enforcement does the paperwork, and the state approves or confirms it since it is a state law. The FBI just makes sure that none of the information is cross-referenced in their files as someone who is wanted for questioning in high profile cases or has warrants in other states. That’s an essential function of the FBI, as being a police force on a national level.

      1. You obviously have little understanding on how the NFA process works. It has nothing to do with state law as it is all federal level and coordinated through the BATFE. The CLEO signature predates NICS and that is its only purpose. The CLEO has no obligation to do anything. Some CLEO’s refuse to sign NFA paperwork because they support gun control. Some approve it because they don’t care either way. Regardless, all they do is sign. The paperwork then goes to the BATFE which then forwards the fingerprint cards to the FBI for the criminal background check portion. The BATFE case manager then works on the Form 1 or Form 4 and figures out if it is a) NFA and b) if it is legal in the recipients state. Then it is approved or denied.

        By forming a living trust you do not need a CLEO signature or fingerprint cards. Soon the ATF is doing away with the CLEO signature as it is pointless since the FBI does the background check anyways. In the future you will just need the Form 1 or 4, fingerprint cards, and the 3rd form that is usually not mentioned that states your residency. 

        Once again, the CLEO should not be performing a background check as that is not his duty or obligation and soon enough they won’t even be a part of the process.

      2.  No the state le has nothing to do with NFA items. They sign to indicate they do not PERSONALLY know of a reason why you should not have one nothing more. If the state was required to do some kind of check then I would have to have a local Le sign mine. I have a trust and no le sign off, fingerprint card or photo is needed for me.

    1. YEP! the only sound a baseball bat makes is the crack off your dumb skull!  yessah!  hey how about a knife silencer or a really good muffler on my car , I can kill with any of those, even just a muffler. when will you learn that laws are for honest people?  totally ban all weapons and all you have left is thugs shopping the black market and you stopping them with what? a pillow?

      1. ” the only sound a baseball bat makes is the crack off your dumb skull! ”
        Poor cowardly little cry baby – you wouldn’t  stand a chance.

        nossuh

    2. Suppressors don’t silence, they reduce the noise sure, but it is a far cry from the hollywood “silencers”

  7. This is great news for us neighbors who can’t stand listening to people playing World War III on the other side of the woods.

    1. You do note that you must have a specific permit and pay a $200 tax per unit purchsed, this won’t be the mainstream issue people are making it out to be. In fact unlike other firearms, all of those devices under the “Class 3 Weapons” umbrella are tracked and and must be accounted for upon request.

      1. You are right in spirit wrong in message. They do not have to be accounted for by request and owning them doesn’t give the ATF the freedom to come in and inspect your home at will. There is paperwork and taxes and a few limitations for machine guns and sbr/sbs’ but nothing beyond that.

        1. Thanks for straightening my info, I was under he impression that suppressors were classified in the same group as full y automatic firearms and all were required to be “licensed”, thus accountable.  My view is “upon request” is when law enforcement has a warrant due to the suspicion our firearms or device was used in the commission of  a crime. This is opposed to semi- auto and other actions hat do not require any governmental transfer paperwork.

  8. They are banned for hunting in Maine.   If you possess one and shoot someone with a gun that is  has a suppressor on it, it clearly shows intention so there won’t be much plea bargaining. Maine doesn’t typically have noise complaints when it comes to gun clubs and shooting ranges.   So I’m wondering where is and why is there a market?    

    It does make it easier for poachers, which is where the market lies I think.

    1. It reduces hearing loss, among many other things, which makes recreational shooting much more pleasant and less dangerous to the shooter and bystanders. This is also America and as an American we should never be asked why, only why not.

      edit: It is very troublesome and cost prohibitive to get a suppressor for poaching, especially when poachers very well could be prohibited possessors in the first place. There are also many other methods of poaching that are very quiet, like crossbows etc. Why make wild unfounded accusations for what these devices are being used for?

      1. Are you serious?    hearing loss!?……that’s rich perifunl.    You don’t suppose that all of the ear protection available is quite capable of handling the job of bringing the decibel levels down to acceptable levels?    That’s quite an expensive ear plug don’t you think?

        And if America is such a why not nation,   why can’t I just go ahead and build me a small nuclear device to provide myself with my own power or protection?

        Crossbows are used for poaching, obviously.  But the surety of the animal dropping on the spot is very questionable, especially at night when one needs to be quick  with a kill and not search for the poached animal.   And your insane conclusion that poachers would be prohibited possessors is sophomoric;  you assume that, since they are poachers  they would not be eligible for possession. They would have to be caught first !!  Also,  what if the poacher is from out of state?   What if the suppressor was sold illegally?  

        How does a silencer fall under the 2nd amendment?   It’s the right to bear arms, not the right to bear modifications to them. I believe in the 2nd amendment as it is written, not what YOU think that it protects. The only silencer I believe in is the one that should be attached to Ted Nugent’s friggin mouth.

        1. Well rusjan, you can say what you want.  But I notice that your comments aren’t getting many “likes” today and that about says it all.

          As for your comments about the availability of hearing protection, by your logic we don’t need mufflers on lawn mowers or any other kind of power equipment, since it’s considered good practice to wear hearing protection with all that equipment as well, why not just make those things all as loud as manufacturers care to make them to save a few bucks?

          1. Not as many “likes” because the monkeys are all in the trees today. You truly believe that the number of “likes” validates a comment, or shows more agreement? Not everyone is as well-programmed as some.

          2. I don’t post comments to accrue “likes”,   I could care less about them.  I like the responses;
            Such as the guy who has hunting dogs that are scared after “2 or 3 shots!”    Hahaha,   “hunting dogs”…….right, ok.     According to Stephen’ and his logic,  he can hunt with his dogs,   but he better not miss!

            And Beltram, why do all of the professional target shooters wear ear protection? The manufacturer’s suggestions regarding lawn mower’s etc, is just that, a suggestion. We have mufflers on cars because,……the law says we have to have them. Your argument is weak and frail…….I just don’t “like” it at all.

          3.  I don’t wear hearing protection when I hunt. When I grab 300 rounds and shoot targets I do. The dogs are not scared of the shots it just hurts their ears. When I open the door to go to change targets they are right there with me, thinking we are going to hunt. If you could hear as well as they do you might buy supressors for your neighbors.

        2.  I have 2 hunting dogs that don’t flinch for 2 or 3 shots. When friends come over to shoot targets you will find them under the bed in the back room. I have protection for people but try to put it on a Jack russel.

        3. I believe in what the 1st amendment says and it doesn’t mention the internet. I also happen to disagree with you so maybe you shouldn’t be allowed to post on it.

          Good thing most people realize that legislation shouldn’t be created because a single person can’t realize that just because they don’t see a use in something it isn’t useless.

          1. Huh?    that made no sense.    If the 1st amendment doesn’t mention the internet,   then the 2nd  amendment certainly doesn’t include silencer’s on guns.  

            Good thing people have a choice.

          1. Of course I believe in the freedom of speech,   we wouldn’t be posting these post if we did not have it.  However, there are limits.   Such as in a criminal trial where a witness states ” that so and so, says    …  “I’m gonna kill you”,        Is that freedom of speech?  or is it evidence and possibly conviction of criminal threatening?

          1. Dont go there, most on this site think that only happens in the movies. They think the government is their friend. Yippie!!  They think the government gives them money around tax time. They forget how this country they live in was founded. You just can’t fix stupid.

          2. Calm down Mike…..I’m not anti-gun!       I’m anti people killing people with guns for $104 bucks in their pocket.   I’m sick of drug dealers being more heavily armed than law enforcement, and I’m appalled that “survivalist” can dig a hole in the side of a hill to create their own little bunker laden with bombs, guns, assault weapons and booby traps and go there to hide after he murders his wife and daughter.

            Yup,….that’s not what the 2nd amendment protects.   This scenario happened in Washington State, this very week. How many times have you heard the words “murder/suicide” ? How does the 2nd amendment protect the “murder” portion of that? How does any amendment or law protect that person? The framer’s of the constitution decided that people can protect themselves against invasion, not kill each other over money and drugs, or even a failed relationship, with an AK with a silencer on it.

            I’ve killed my share of deer, and I enjoyed trap shooting and targeting, but the US has the highest rate of gun related crimes, illegal imports, and has been at some state of war, with someone for nearly 210 years, we haven’t been at war for approximately 35 years of our nations existence.

      2. “As an American, (I suppose you meant “as Americans”), we should never be asked why, only why not.”  So, you are not in favor of democracy, nor of the republic, but prefer anarchy.

        All “Americans” should do as we please, have no laws, be responsible for nothing other than ourselves…  No need for such stupid things like speed limits, either, because that driver that’s doing 60 miles an hour through 40 mph zones, knows he’s in control, and all those stupid laws are for the other guys, right?

        But you and so many others can always bend the rules and the laws and the intention of a Constitution written lifetimes ago to suit your self-serving, undemocratic, unpatriotic, mindless, ball-holding.

        1. that’s one  way of demonizing his view to get your point across.If you don’t like the laws of this State why are you here?When they start restricting things is when I move you should be proud of the freedom’s Maine offers our laws say we are free not subjects.

          1. “If you don’t like the laws of this State, (where did I indicate that?), then why are you here?”
            “Get over yourself.”
            “Get a life.”
            “You must be a “Commie,” “Neocon,” “Libturd,” “Repukelican.”
            and so it goes…

        1. The 2nd amendment gives a person the right to bear arms,  it does not grant that person the right to have a silencer on it.  Just as the 1st amendment protects the freedom of speech,  but it does not give the right for a person to go into a theater and scream “FIRE!”

          1. And, as far as I know, the country remains safe from British and Spanish rule, and there is no Civil War.

          2. Read the history books that your children are learning from these days and you will have your answer.    I doubt if you will like it.

  9. I’ve got three-
    “Suppressors” are a lot easier on the ears and allow me to hear other things on the range

  10. I can’t afford this. I’ll just put a box of cotton balls by the front door and a sign advising home invaders about appropriate hearing protection measures.

  11. the 1934 law needs to be repealed,hello it’s 2012…needed especially for target shooting..
    I wonder if one of our Congress people would sponsor a bill to repeal? I doubt it…

    1. The” liberal anti gun base” is something dreamed up by the NRA you’re just sucker enough to fall for it. Keep drinking the koolaid. It helps with NRA recruitment and the $35.00 year dues. Suckers for conservative talk radio and faux news are good for something its called $$.

      1. We understand that you would perfer to use pointed carrots to protect yourself,  family and country.
        The only reason socialism exsist in this world is because the USA protects it’s people

        1. You wrote, “The only reason socialism exists in this world is because the USA protects its people.”  What?

      2.  If not for the NRA the entire country would be like Washington DC and Detroit where murders are commonplace and law abiding citizens are prohibited from protecting themselves from the thugs who infest such liberal enclaves.

        1. Keep believeing that.  One man standing alone is your worst nightmare.  You all need a group in order to be ‘big’ men.  And automatic weapons.

          1. I would be glad to stand with “oldmainer” on this one!

            edit: I don’t own an automatic weapon but I believe if I wanted one I should be able to purchase one…

          2. “Keep believeing that.  One man standing alone is your worst nightmare. 
            You all need a group in order to be ‘big’ men.  And automatic weapons.”

            My personal choice for self defense firearms does not include “automatic weapons”.

            Choice #1 – Mossberg 12g pump action with one shell of bird shot followed by 00 buck.
            Choice #2 – Ruger P85 9mm semi-automatic with serrated SJHP.

          3. I need no group and will stand alone a right is just that and as long as i do not violate the law the law must protect my rights. O yah and i own no automatic weapons.

      3. No it’s not it comes from the UN trying to remove guns from the populace that’s why uero’s lost their guns.They are pushing hard here in the USA also, trying to make our constitution obsolete.A canadian un rep the Japanese rep and I forgot the ladys name she is Great Britian’s Rep I believe it’s been awhile since i read the article on msnbc.Ask folks from over thier about how their crime rates went up and how only criminal’s now own guns.If you don’t like guns fine don’t buy one but don’t try to say nobody should be allowed to have them.The gun nor the suppressor kill people.The owner does more laws only stop honest people does nothing to criminal’s.If those people in the UN win America will no longer be America.and all they need are a few people who says it’s ok  guys we don’t need those.

        1. Why do you need a silencer for personal or home protection? I’ll plan on shooting to kill first and worry about the report later. No one needs these things.

  12. “Felons are prohibited from owning silencers”… that’s interesting… why would a convicted felon, who is prohibited from owning a gun, want to own a silencer?

    Are felons prohibited from owning bullets, too?  How about targets? Can they buy a bullseye target and just hang it in their living room?

    1. Actually felons are prohibited from possessing ammunition though I don’t think targets are controlled ;)

  13. No civilian needs a semi-automatic weapon, assault weapon, etc.  “…the dangerous, thunderous report” ? Not the danger of idiots in possession of guns they cannot possibly use. 

    Once again, a picture is worth a thousand words, and, in this case, 9 mm bullets fired at 1,000 feet per second.  No one needs this kind of weapon. 

    1. No reason not to own one.. 
      Any type of firearm that the military has, should be allowed for the general public.
      The most dangerous people on the planet are government officals, who use the military to control its people.
      So I am happy people own big guns. 

      1. How many U.S. Army, or members of the Legislature are surrounding your home.  Should we grab our pitchforks and rescue you?  A machine gun is not something you need to own. 

        You’re saying that you believe that the U.S. military is controlling U.S. citizens with weapons.  Somebody — please — send this guy off to a war zone so he can (maybe) learn the difference.

        1. DON’T MAKE LIGHT OF THIS . JUST GET THREE OR FOUR HUNDRED PEOPLE TOGETHER AND ARGUE WITH THE POWERS THAT BE AND SEE HOW FAST THE MILITARY CONTROLS YOU. THIS IS A FREE COUNTRY AS LONG AS YOU DO WHAT YOU ARE TOLD AND IF THE ANTIGUN FOOLS GET THIER WAY IT WILL BE A HELL OF A LOT WORSE. AS LONG AS CITIZENS HAVE WEAPONS THEY CAN’T COMPLETELY CONTROL US.WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO PROTECT OURSELVES. SIMPLE. 

    2.  please tell that to the millions of Jews in Germany. Sorry you can’t , the people who did have them , killed them. Armed civilians keep governments honest.

      1. Oh.  I don’t get to reply.  Germany.  During the war.  As absurd an analogy as I’ve ever heard.

        YOU are the guys who want to control any and every sentient person in the United States.

        1. Actually, that analogy is apt, and stands as only one example of countries that force to suppress the will of the people.

          If you doubt that, then you need to pay attention to international news

          1. Oh, Lawd.  We are, indeed, doomed to imbecilic thinking.

            Are you feeling, “suppressed”?  Try a laxative.

      1. That’s “obvious,” eh?  No civilian needs a machine gun.  No one. 

        You have made a very good point. All anyone needs to know is how to load a firearm, and the location of the trigger. Knowledge, per se, of firearms is unnecessary. And y’all want people to have any firearm they can get their hands on. Great.

        1. And no civilian can own a “machine gun” unless they have the proper tax stamps and licenses.

          1. JD not to mention a boat load of money.  Getting a full auto isn’t like stopping and getting any other gun.  Last I knew they were thousands of dollars pretty much taking most people of out the purchasing arena.  I could be wrong though, been awhile since I worked in that field.

        2. I know woman who own AR platforms and glocks and enjoy target practicing. My wife wants a hand gun.

    3. I have numerous hunting rifles that are far more deadly than said 9mm. In fact I have a pellet gun that will send an approx.  5.5mm projectile  at more than 1000 fps. Don’t use number you don’t understand. 

      How a firearms looks, is not at all representative of it’s danger. In fact, firearms are completely harmless without human control (or lack thereof). 

      1. No kidding.  Any gun will kill.  But you cannot deny the intoxicating lure of embracing  a big, repeating, automatic  weapon, as opposed to say, a .22 Winchester.

        1. You can purchase 50 round magazines for a Ruger 10-22 .22 semi-automatic rifle which is one of the most popular “plinking” rifles in the U.S.

          And since you brought it up, please define what an “assault rifle” is.

        2.  A baby blue Prius will kill someone faster then a gun – every firearm is a tool used by an individual just like every automobile is used by an individual. Homicides occur with vehicles all the time – why don’t we ban big bad trucks because “clearly” a big diesel truck would be some small guys complex right? Dump your Freudian logic. Firearms are tools plain and simple. Teach people respect and punish those who refuse to abide by the laws of the land. Accountability isn’t something liberals believe in though is it? Blame guns not evil people – how convenient.

    4. Using your logic I don’t think anyone needs a tv, radio, or the internet.  All these can be used dangerously in handled incorrectly and the fact that people get enjoyment and education while using them is of no consequence.  Basically, I don’t like them so I don’t want you or anyone else to have them either.  

      1. No.  What you are saying is irrational and illogical.  You couldn’t spot a logical, or illogical statement if it bit you in the arse.  Seriously.  How can you make that analogy unless you are … never mind.

    5. Who are you to make that choice for me? I wore this country’s uniform and i pay my taxes.Europe lives in a way that is closer to your view’s

      1. I’m not making any choice for you.  I state that no civilian needs weapons of this type.  Boy scout?

          1. You have said multiple times that “no civilian needs” a type of weapon or thing that you don’t like. What qualifies you to make a statement about what others need?

    6. OBVIOSLEY YOU DON’T KNOW MUCH ABOUT FIREARMS .  A THOUSAND FEET PER SECOND IS NOTHING COMPARED TO A THIRTY OT SIX HUNTING RIFLE THAT SENDS A BULLIT OUT THERE NEARLY A MILE IN A SECOND OR A 223 THATS EVEN FASTER SO DON’T COMPLAIN ABOUT THE 9MM. SUPPRESSER OR NOT NO ONE HEARS THE ONE THAT KILLS THEM.

  14. I think there should be a law that mandates that all Mainers have a automatic weapon and at least one 50 cal  weapon….   

        1. Put it on a flat bed of a semi, throw a tarp of it and it’s concealed. Haul it around without the tarp, open carry. After all the gun is just slightly larger that a VW. 

  15. I can see the beauty of silencers. If someone is going to shoot me, there’s no reason he has to blast my ears…..unless that’s where he shoots me.

  16. I have often pondered the effectiveness of a 9mm vis a vis the harpoon… Each, it would seem, in the right hands, would be an adequate deterrent against insurgents hell-bent on destroying the Constitution and Republic of the United States of America. I guess that’s why the second amendment permits its citizens to keep and bear arms. In hindsight, the Founding Fathers displayed a wonderfully profound understanding of human nature, enumerating in clear and concise language why American citizens need to be vigilant… and armed.

  17. Sweet!  Now when there is a gun battle in Lamoine, it wont wake up the neighbors.  Except for those noisy  sirens.

  18. Seems like an excellent way to introduce a youngster or someone new to the sport. Without the loud report to scare them off they can focus on safety and accuracy.

    1. Exactly.. I have taught many kids and females using  a 22 with a suppressor.   Woman tend to be much more apprehensive about the sound and the recoil both are dramatically reduced by using a suppressor.

      1. Just thinking that it was important in my firearm training to hear the sound of the gun.  The brain additionally connects with the sound, making the fact of firing, all the more real.  My Dad would not have wanted to lessen any of the full import of what a gun can do. 

  19. “His most popular silencer screw onto the end of a .22 caliber rifle, a target GUN [sic].” (emphasis added).

    Note to editor:  You should add an entry to your style manual about rifles and guns.  A rifle is a rifle.  It is not a gun and should not be called a gun.

  20. You need no reason to want one of these and should not have to explain. It’s your right to have a silencer, assault rifle or handgun. Until the constitution changes than when someone asks you why its because I can.

  21. There is no check on the part of local law enforcement. Also they are
    not “class 3” They are NFA ( national firearms act) items class 3 is one
    of the licenses the SELLER need it is a SOT tax a class three sells
    them a class 2 can make and sell them.

    They are great for shooting. Unlike many other states Maine being
    ignorant still has not let them be used for hunting. They are a SAFETY
    device and make shooting much safer. They in addition to reducing the
    noise reduce recoil and almost completely eliminate muzzle flash.

    Last if you form a trust you do not need fingerprint cards, a photo or a local le sign off. I have one of these.

    We need to get Maine to allow suppressors to be used while hunting.   

  22. One of the problems with the paranoia of gun control is that you have people hauling weapons around like toys. The other day while working out at my local club a guy pulls his 9mm out of his gym bag so he can show it to the 11 year old daughter of another friend of mine. No consideration of others around him “the gun is unloaded” and makes me cringe after the meticulous safety training I got in the Military .

    The point is this behavior is as dangerous as any extreme position on gun control.

    BTW, I can see a silencer being an asset in target shooting after losing hearing over the years to extensive loud noises…;)

  23. “No civilian needs …”

    Yes, I understand that all us civilians are scum and we should humble ourselves before those who are not.

    So what kind of background check do the feds run on the Mayberry PD before they are allowed to purchase a fully automatic rifle or an armored car (assault vehicle would be a better description)? I’ve known some Andy and Barney type PD’s over the years. The idea of
    them being allowed to own such hardware is a bit scary.

  24. I’m waiting for the comment from the gun-head that explains to me how a silencer is critical for defending against home invasion.
    Unless you want to go deaf while shooting a home invader they are pretty important there is no way in hell you would have time to find your ear plugs and unless you are nieve you would know how loud they are.

  25. Someone who can think of alternatives and who is not paranoic believing our own country is against us?

  26. You’re absolutely correct.  I know diddly about firearms.  Load, point, shoot – that’s the whole point isn’t it? 

    As to the suppresser — I WANT to hear people shooting in the woods so I know to stay far, far away.

  27. That man should have been asked to leave the building with his weapon.  Why would he show an 11 year old girl his 9 mm gun, and what certainty was there that it was unloaded.

    This is insane.

  28. what if I want one because I think that they’re fun to play with? oh I get it, because there are people that have no interest in shooting of any kind I need to not have one and they should be made illegal.
    Jerks next thing you know you will be coming after my alluminum baseball bats,large kitchen knives, and my automobile as well.

  29. Still waiting on the BATF on my paper work, they have had it about 6 months……Busy people….

  30. The moderator is not removing your comment.  You are resorting to implying that I am taking drugs because you are incapable of comprehension.  Let me see if  I can make this clear to you.

    You, and others, do not have the courage to stand alone on an opinion, a right, or an injustice,  having to hide behind the skirts of the NRA or any other group.  The individual man with courage and conviction must frighten you.

    1. He does’nt scare  me i only have weapons to protect myself and family from others who have them.what do you think we should do lay down and play dead? If my cousin had a pistol in his hand he may have been able to save a 10 year olds life as well as his own ,but i guess the antigun folks think we should give up our guns and be at the mercy of criminals.

  31. I had nightmares about this and couldn’t sleep.  Did any of you speak to club management about this, or move to intervene, after removing the 11 year old, and all other club members out of harm’s way?  Do any of you have the intention of doing so?  This was a bizarre and dangerous act.

    Presumably the little girl said, “Daddy, that man showed me his gun.”  How was this handled?  Very bizarre and dangerous behavior on the part of that other club member.  Even if he, and others, were prohibited from bringing guns into this club, I would watch him like a hawk, or as if I were the child’s, and other children’s mother.

  32.  Silencers are great, but everyone needs to help keep law enforcement them out of the hands of criminals.

  33. You’re resorting to use of the “liberal” epithet in your vain attempt to sanction firearms as tools that are as dangerous as cars.  No one here is blaming guns.  How sophomoric.

  34. 1)  Because I do feel sorry for anyone who has a handgun in the home, because the chances of it being discharged in error are very high, and there is no second chance;

    2)  I’m not deciding anything for anyone else.  I’m just not part of this mob mentality, and, as with any mob mentality, everyone must be in agreement. 

  35. Why do you all work so hard to feed your own paranoia?  What unarmed person would attempt to reason with all you heavily-stockaded, paranoics? 

    You are safe.  No one is taking anything from you.  I have not seen one post that suggested the banning of personal weapons.  It’s a matter of scale, and the rational fear that heavy weaponry is not warranted.

  36. No one “needs” a vehicle that can go faster than 60 MPH.  Or potato chips.   Chocolate.  Soda.  Beer.  Wine.  Large houses.  Fast food in general.  Swimming pools.  Trampolines.

    I can make an endless list of things that can be misused and harm other people or injure the user.  By your logic we should ban anything and everything that can be misused. 

  37. Sorry…legality is hardly the issue here.  Why in Gods name would you NEED a submachine gun with a silencer.  “You come to my town I’m going to arrest you.”  Yeah, with what authority might you have to do this?

    Yeah, give idiots guns and yo end up with a Travon Martin situation.

    1. Are you serious,,, The weapon in the Travon Martin case was a pistol, not an assault weapon, and it did not have a suppressor.

      Think before you comment, your ill informed comments only prove that uneducated anti-gun liberals dont have a clue about guns.

  38. I’m really not worried about any serious threats to the 2nd Amendment because there are enough Blue Dog Democrats. Hardcore Republicans & conservative Independents to allow any more laws to an already overly restricted American Right…!

  39. Beware of smiling bureaucrats who hold the US Constitution in contempt… lest we forget that once our freedoms have been infringed upon in the slightest degree, our voices will forever be silenced by a legion of inferiors who despise us.

  40. Just got the word mine got approved by the BATF…. Little over 6 months to process……..One good thing about Obama, he is boosting sales of guns, ammo etc….

  41. Ah, but I was only providing examples of overworked, ignorant, yet popular, phrases.  But ‘even’ a Communist would know that the correct form the contraction for “you are” is “you’re.”  And that “too,” means “also.  And, “to” is directional.

    1.  My 11 year old daughter would have loved to see a different 9mm. She would have expected him to drop the mag, open and lock the slide and pass it to her handle first. That is the way she was taught  before she got her first hunting license at 10.

  42. I guess this means we won’t be bothered by noise when our neighbors are shooting each other.. or us.

  43. No machine guns or suppressors (for sbr’s sbs’s aow’s) require a license to possess, just a tax stamp which is $200 in all cases except for an AOW transfer which is 5$. If law enforcement has a warrant that is hardly a request, it is an order from a judge. There is no requirements that you show your firearms to anyone just because you own them. Even then the only thing that law enforcement NEEDS to see if they have any questions w/r/t legality is the copy of the tax stamp which should always accompany the firearm to make the owners life easier. The original tax stamp should be locked away in a very safe place.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *